Knitting a square & joining things.

[jackandahat]

(Forgive me, this is going to be a stupid question)

I'm trying to join some other pieces together by picking up a side from each and knitting a square in the middle, decreasing towards the centre.

But I'm struggling with the "How many and how often?" part of decreasing. Doing sl1 k2tog psso at each corner still gets me a lump in the middle.

How would you decrease to make a flat square?

Second, hopefully less daft question - how do you go about joining pieces using knitting? I'd like to make an afghan out of blocks, but I'd rather not do that amount of sewing if possible. Which is where I ended up on the problem above. All the patterns I've found so far are either log-cabin type where it gets bigger and bigger, rather than something you can work on in small pieces, or they're pieces sewn together after.

Comments

[hazel]

I would probably just pick up stitches along one edge of the completed square in my new colour. And then you could stop at, say, a length of 4 or 6 squares, and just have the long seams down the edge to sew to other bits of afghan.

(Other people may have better techniques, though!)

[jackandahat]

I'm not sure I'm understanding - if you pick up down one side, aren't you still going to have to sew the squares together where they touch top-to-bottom?

[nitoda]

I have joined squares by picking up from the cast off edge of one and joining to the side edge of another at the end of each row if you see what I mean ... You could knit in strips this way, but if you want a technique other than sewing to join lots of separate squares, you should probably look at crochet.

[jackandahat]

*nods* I'm really after something that'll give me lots of single pieces up until near the end - I have trouble with my hands, and trying to drag around the weight of a big bit of knitting makes it much harder (as I found when I knit a lap-quilt, and had a few hundred rows of 150 stitches wide on my lap!)

[hobbitbabe]

When we were kids, we made lots of single squares out of our mother's scraps, and then I enlisted a neighbour to show me how to crochet them together. I don't know the names of the crochet stitches, so I can't tell someone else how I did it without showing. But basically it involved drawing a couple of loops through one square and securing them, then making a little chain over to the next square, and zigzagging back and forth. To minimize the number of ends I'd have to sew in, I used a series of zig-zag diagonals to build up the afghan. The crochet seams were quite open - like you would stick toes through them accidentally - but that helped with our widely varying size of squares.

More recently, I've done an afghan that was long strips like scarves, sewn together with mattress stitch, and a couple that were built up from mitred squares so they wouldn't meet your criteria of having lightweight pieces until the end.

[jackandahat]

Wouldn't meet the criteria, no, but it is always interesting to hear how other people have done stuff - that's what I like about the comms. (Also, it's only right *now* that I need them to be lightweight, that could change in future. So good to know!)

The crochet way sounds useful, especially if it lets you do varying sizes of shapes.

[pinesandmaples]

Knit the blanket in pieces then:

crochet them together.

pick up stitches and do 3-needle bind-offs.

pick up stitches and do some other bind-off you are about to invent.

sew.

If you are looking for speed and general appearance, crochet is your winner here.

Added: The joining things to things problem up top sounds like you are describing a mitered square. If so, you'll always have a ridge of bumps.

[jackandahat]

I don't know 3-needle bind-off, but it gives me something to google, so thank you. (That's part of my problem - I have no idea what to even search for - "joining squares" just gets me a lot about sewing.)

Like a mitered square, yeah, but I'm knitting inwards from all four sides rather than two. I don't mean the row of bumps, that's fine - I mean that it's not remotely flat, it looks like a hill - sticks up in the middle. So I'm obviously not decreasing *enough*, or fast enough or whatever.

(What I was doing was laying out the four pieces I had like a plus-sign with a gap in the middle, picking up the inside edge of each, and trying to decrease at each corner until they were joined by a square. Except, yeah, hello knitted!hill.)

[pinesandmaples]

Based on the questions you've been asking, I'm going to recommend you borrow or buy a knitting technique book. I think seeing the techniques and their common names (and some techniques have about 8 names!) presented would help you a lot in knowing how to tackle your problems. A lot of knitters panic in the face of the unknown; it's much easier to keep calm if you know that the problem can be solved by something called the Gargle-Leaped Twirl, even if you don't know how to do a Gargle-Leaped Twirl.

The Knitter's Companion by Vicki Square is a good start. And make sure to check your local library for their knitting selection, because every pattern book as a technique section that will explain the basics. Actually, the Stitch and Bitch series might also be a resource here...

You are decreasing too slowly. Rip and re-knit. Or why not just knit another square and seam them together using one of the above methods? Or heck, go all out and make the bottom piece a mitered square.

[jackandahat]

I'm not panicking, I'm asking questions. My library has a couple of books on kids' toys from the 80s, that's all, so I use the internet for the most part. I just thought I'd ask here in case anyone had some answers.

I figured I was decreasing too slowly, that's why I asked how other people would. This is just a practice, I was trying to see if it was a plausible technique.

[pinesandmaples]

Yes, you are just asking questions. But why not arm yourself with knowledge before you get to the questions? You seem to be reaching for technique names, and I'm suggesting that you could learn those things instead of asking us vague questions every time you come upon something. Make your knitting more triumphant with less commentary from the peanut gallery. Empowering the knitter, etc.

If you are using the internet, I recommend TECHknitting as someone who Knows Things™.

[jackandahat]

I'm sorry, I didn't realise that it was so frowned on to ask other people for help or want to discuss things.

I'm really not sure what makes you think I'm asking "every" time I come across something, but I'm sure you're basing your assumption on something.

[pinesandmaples]

Whatever. You want to ask vague questions that no one understands, please ask away. Sick of this.

[jackandahat]

Given several people have given me useful advice, I'm not sure why you think "no-one understands".

[nitoda]

oooh - idea! If you are trying to fill a square hole in the middle of other squares, could you start in one corner and knit like you would a triangular scarf, starting with one stitch and increasing and picking up at ends as you go making a diagonally knit square in the middle? Could make for an interesting texture?

[jackandahat]

That's actually my plan for stray corners, but as long as I'm careful with the decreases in the second half that could be a cool alternative to the into-the-middle square.

[medrin]

As for the square decreasing towards the centre, the maths sounds right with sl1 k2tog psso, (at, I'm assuming, every other lap) Maybe you should just try binding off when you have 12 left instead of 4.

As for the second question: From what I'm gathering you want to knit each square separately and then join them together without sewing. My first thought was to use some crocheting. I'm thinking adapting a crochet bind of. That when you pick up the stitches with the crochet hook you go through the side of the piece you want to attach it to with the crochet hook, pull the stitch trough and then do the crochet stitch on the other side (hope that makes sense). To get enough live stitch edges you might want to do a cast on that gives you another live edge. Or you can just simply crochet two sides together (place them with the front facing each other and do a row of chains through the side.)

[jackandahat]

Yeah, every other row. I shall try with 12, thank you.

Yep, that's what I'm after - from what people are saying, looks like I shall have to learn to crochet!

[medrin]

Hmm... I've been doing some thinking and calculating. I realized that maybe you are doing stockinette stitching instead of garter stitching.

In garter stitching the ratio between stitches and rows are about 1:2 therefore the decreases to get a triangle is one in each corner every other row, but for stockinette this ratio is closer to 1:1.5 (I got this from checking the gauges printed on yarn) so to get an even triangle you should do a decrease for every two out of three rows. Might be worth a try...

[jackandahat]

*facepalm* That's one of those things that would make perfect sense... and never crossed my mind. Thank you - I will try that one.

[jackandahat]

Just coming back to say it worked. Ta very much, you've solved my problem!

[medrin]

You're very welcome! I'm always happy when I can help someone!

[jackandahat]

Now I can take over the world!!! plot what I'm actually going to do with my afghan - I have ideas, but nothing concrete yet. I might actually have it finished by November...

[aquaeri]

Yeah, your "how many decreases per row" problem on the inward-knitted squares depends on the stitch you're using, and your particular knitting style. If your stitches were perfectly square, three->one in each of four corners would work perfectly. Two rows of garter is close enough to square for most people for this to work every second row. But for other stitches, you have to adjust so you decrease often enough, but not too often. Every two out of three sounds, like medrin says, a good one to try with a typical stocking stitch pattern. If you've got ribbing or lace or anything else, you'll need a gauge swatch and a bit of maths. (Which I will happily help you with if that's an issue.)

And from my experience with hats, yeah, the 12-stitch row is probably the one to bind off on unless you're fond of nipples.

[jackandahat]

See, I was all nodding along, and yep, that's good advice, I'll try that... and then I got to the last line and cracked up. *grins*

Thank you - yeah, I hadn't taken that into consideration. Which might be what I get for knitting at 6am, frankly.

And that's exactly what I was wondering - I knew it must be possible to do the squares like that, I just knew "3 stitches every other row" wasn't working, and couldn't wrap my head around what number/how often it should be.

Cheers!

[aquaeri]

Getting you to crack up was all part of my evil plan. I'm glad you sound all set to tackle this now.

[jackandahat]

You are evil, and I shall remember this. *nods*

Actually, this is all my Evil Housemate's fault. She can't even knit, but she's willing to listen to me talk about mine, and she is encouraging me to make an afghan. And keeps coming up with ideas, usually late at night when I'm highly suggestible, and then next thing you know you have four cabled owls and cotton tied around your wrist with a 3.25 dpn stuck behind your ear...

[starfish]

If you don't have Elizabeth Zimmerman's Knitter's Almanac, and have some discretionary funds, pick up a copy. It's a good read, and there are tons of techniques and tips in there, as well as patterns. The chapter I just read last night is about knitting squares for a blanket ... leaving the edges "live" (on waste yarn) and doing something she calls "weaving" to get the edges together.

[jackandahat]

I don't have spare cash right now, but I'll write that one down for when I do, thank you - I've heard good things about it.

A pro tip re: zimmerman

[jazzypom]

She isn't the easiest read out there (Zimmerman tends to... chunder along). But if you've been around the knitting block a few times, she's aces.

Re: A pro tip re: zimmerman

[jackandahat]

Ahh, I'll keep that in mind - I haven't actually read anything of hers yet. I do get the majority of my info off the net - the only knitting books I actually own are Yarn Harlot ones.

"around the block" - I never know how to assess my skills. On the one hand, I did my leaves blanket while organising a major house move, and I'm cheerfully knitting lace while RP tagging. On the other hand... I just failed to knit a square. *facepalm*

Hmmm

[jazzypom]

Well, if you can read patterns, know more than knit, purl and garter stitch, you've moved past a beginner. In addition, you've done socks and cables, so I'd peg you for an intermediate. So if you know all that, and have knitted a garment or two, Zimmerman is for you.

I honestly can't say that I've liked her book (I have Knitting Without Tears). In an age of Ikea, where one has loads of diagrams, and pretty much instructions which are A goes into B, I find Zimmerman's Midwestern folksy, "Come in and sit a spell, and oooh, look how spunky I am" style really aggravating.

If you have a thrift shop near you and you sight a Montse Stanley book for knitters, I'd say get it. It's pretty simple and straightforward and I finally understood the mystery of short row shaping.

Re: Hmmm

[jackandahat]

Cables are the most recent thing - up until the other week with Fetching I'd done them once, hated them (that'll teach me to try in acrylic, though I didn't understand that at the time) and ignored them. There's a lot I can't do - like colourwork - but that's mostly because I haven't tried, I've been busy doing other stuff and haven't sat down to try and learn. I haven't yet hit anything that's totally thrown me once I've picked at it.

I don't know about the spunky, but I tend to find text-based (rather than diagram-based) stuff interesting at least. I might see if the library has it on loan - sadly, their knitting section seems to be three books on baby jumpers.

I'll keep an eye out for that, there are a couple of charity shops in town.

Lace is my bug bear

[jazzypom]

That's the only thing I really want to get, but I can't. I can't get my head around it, and that's the only thing I want to do. Boo.

Re: Lace is my bug bear

[jackandahat]

It's not my preferred stuff, I prefer stuff like this, don't know what to call it, but where there's a design shaped in but not lots of holes. But it is frustrating when the one thing you really want is taunting you. Evil lace...

Yeah, that's lace

[jazzypom]

I think the yarn thickness and the nupps (those raised balls) makes the lace a bit more muscular than we're used to seeing, but that's lace.

Re: Yeah, that's lace

[jackandahat]

Ahhh, I wasn't thinking of that as lace! I'm playing with it at the moment. (Have been for a while, but it's got to the point where it's too big to comfortably put on my lap and not get in the way of the laptop.) Thanks - I didn't know that one.

[aunty_marion]

Hee! Have only just got to this (*kicks computer again*), but I see you've already got a lot of good advice.

I did the squares for the TARDIS top and bottom in the 'round', by casting on four times what the pattern said (for knitting a flat square up from one side), and doing the decreases every other round; but what I did was mark the 'corner' stitches, and decrease each side of those, so each side would be [K1 (corner stitch), SSK, knit to two stitches before next corner stitch, K2tog], and repeat four times. That way you don't get the 'bump' so much, but more flat lines of decreases aiming in towards the centre. For the top, I did a couple of 'steps' where instead of doing one plain round between decrease rounds, I did two - that made it peak more for a slightly slanted roof.

And, serendipitously, that's the second time I've typed up those instructions in two days - one of my friends on Ravelry is attempting a knitted TARDIS. So I'll leave you with the links etc I posted as a comment to her:

"I got the idea for doing the top/bottom that way from iamshadow’s (iamshadow21 on Ravelry) coloured blanket squares - http://www.ravelry.com/projects/IamShadow21/double-vision - which she did that way. http://knittingpix.dreamwidth.org/10443.html is where she talks about it (in the comments, I think?)."

[jackandahat]

Thank you very much - I could mix and match these so I have different types of squares, which would be more interesting.